Forum:Mass Effect Sequel Trilogy???
I got this idea (and it obviously could be built upon) for a Mass Effect Sequel Trilogy. What my basic idea was is it is set hundreds of years after the events of ME3 and follows an all new protaganist and depending on whether or not you took control of the Reapers or destroyed them is what will be in the save file along with historical documents about Shepard's actions spanning the original trilogy. My idea was based around the thought of Liara's archives of her cycle and the Reaper data she collected (as well just imagine the thought of the Normandy being a museum to modern generations). If Liara survived she could even be a character given the lifespan of the Asari. Just a thought I had...a new character hearing about the choices Shepard made, the choices you made and their effect on the modern universe the game is set in. Storywise I have no ideas yet. any thoughts on this idea? ...I personally don't think they should be titled Mass Effect 4-6 though. I think it should stand alone for gamers who never played the original ME trilogy. Yes, the next "Mass Effect" game that comes out shouldn't be titled "Mass Effect 4" because the current trilogy definitely stands on its own. If Bioware/EA is going to make a new trilogy/whatever for this series, they should title it something like "Mass Shift" or "Mass Event" or something like that because I personally think that the word "Mass" in "Mass Effect" will link the next game to this trilogy while changing the last name will indicate that it is a new game in the this wonderful franchise :) The Crazy Tactician! (talk) 21:00, August 4, 2012 (UTC) I don't see a problem with keeping both words "Mass Effect" in the title, tho I agree that it should not be called Mass Effect 4. Given that the adventure would be dealing with the legacy of Sheps descicions something like "Mass Effect Legacy 1-3" would seem appropriate. The problem I see in any follow up is how to factor in how the original trilogy ended. If Shep assumed control over the Reapers then they would still be around, same with Synthesis, tho this last one would also have to include the fact that everyone is now part machine. If Shep destroyed the Reapers then they wouldn't exist. And all this doesn't take into consideration what happened to the other races, such as the krogan and geth/quarians, all of whom face extinction in ME3, for example I always choose to stop Mordin from completing the cure, but seek peace between geth and quarians. With so many descisions that would need to be included in the first episode it would be difficult to script to take into consideration every possible outcome, unless they establish a canon stryline for Shep, which would basically over rule many peoples choices. So while I like the idea of a follow up I don't see it happening.--TSwiftFan1346 (talk) 02:44, August 5, 2012 (UTC) I agree with "TSwiftFan1346" that there would be way too much events to take into account when/if Bioware/EA does indeed to make the next "Mass Effect" game. In terms of the title, I don't think that using "Mass Effect 4" would be appropriate because despite the fact that there is absolutely no doubt that Bioware/EA could link the next game to the existing trilogy, it would create more problems than solutions. I love the title "Mass Effect Legacy 1-3", awesome job coming up with that title "TSwiftFan1346", I sincerely hope that Bioware/EA picks that as the title for the next game(s). The Crazy Tactician! (talk) 22:26, August 11, 2012 (UTC)